|
|
| IanBillen |
I read in a magazine a week and a half ago where Keith stated in a legnthey interview that the Stones were recording on tour last time out and in many different places during the tour. He even went on to say they recorded in hotel rooms.
Then he stated "Maybe a great Stones album will come out of it who knows". This was a magazine that was celebrating Keith's 60th birthday and had him on the cover. I forget the name of it. BUT I CHECKED IT THREE TIMES AND THERE IS NO MISTAKING WHAT WAS STATED BY HIM ABOOUT THIS MATTER AND IT WAS A RECENT INTERVIEW AND HE WAS SPEAKING ABOUT THEM RECORDING ON THe LICKS TOUR> I checked, double checked, and triple checked so I wouldn't be misleading anyone.
Something is up with that.
Ian |
|
|
| stonedatbirth666 |
I hope ya right! xoxoxoxo |
|
|
| scratched |
quote:
IanBillen wrote:
He even went on to say they recorded in hotel rooms.
I like this. Sounds like they're taking a leaf out of Robert Johnson's book. Maybe Charlie got out his fold up drum kit used on SFM. |
|
|
| FotiniD |
Recording in hotel rooms. If this is true, I'm going to go nuts in anticipation of these recordings... That's a true rock 'n' roll spirit... Record in hotels, Jagger-Richards composing together in and out of gigs... Ah... Too good to be true? |
|
|
| Child of the Moon |
Heh, "The Hotel Sessions." I like that. I'd buy it in a heartbeat, because I know the music within would have to be pretty damn good. And preferably Chuck-less. They probably don't even let him in Keith's hotel room, anyway. |
|
|
| FotiniD |
quote:
Child of the Moon wrote:
And preferably Chuck-less. They probably don't even let him in Keith's hotel room, anyway.
Probably!
They'd better not!  |
|
|
| egon |
the fact that they stuck 3 crapy songs on 4 licks,
says something about their ability to create good songs (and to judge what a good song is).
Me negative? you damn right I am, and with reason. |
|
|
| Steel Wheels |
It would be nice if you could recall the magazine's name - it wasn't the Uncut birthday issue... |
|
|
| M.O.W.A.T. |
How about this for a title:
"The Rolling Stones: The Paris Hilton Sessions" |
|
|
| monkeyboymark |
No it was in the Uncut birthday issue-page 53 to be exact!!! |
|
|
| mac_daddy |
you beat me to it, monkeyboy... |
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
Do you think that they may actually put that much talked about "Munich Hotel" (or whatever they call it) on the next album? |
|
|
| Gazza |
>"The Rolling Stones: The Paris Hilton Sessions"
LOL..sounds perfect..although in reality it would have to be the "Hotel George V Sessions" which doesnt quite have the same ring to it!!
I wonder if there'll be an "in depth" video to accompany it...
"Munich Hilton" is the track youre thinking of Snappy.
Is she any relation to Paris?
|
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
All in all, it's time to get serious.
I just read the Uncut issue and the Stones mostly speak ill of a new album. They are not inspired to do it, nor do they care about it. End of discussion.
Sad but true. |
|
|
| FPM C10 |
quote:
Snappy McJack wrote:
All in all, it's time to get serious.
I just read the Uncut issue and the Stones mostly speak ill of a new album. They are not inspired to do it, nor do they care about it. End of discussion.
Sad but true.
Everybody seems to recall this magazine in different ways...I seem to remember MICK being the one who WANTED to do a new album (I think he said "we MUST" )but Keith being the one who was uncertain about whether or not they could. All in all I came away with a more positive feeling about the Stones' future than I've had in a long time.
The songs on 40 Licks aren't GREAT but they aren't terrible; "Well Well" and "Extreme Western Grip" could've turned into something fantastic if they'd had lyrics and a little more shaping. Those last two in particular show the Stones' bluesy side and pointed toward a studio album we could all be happy with.
|
|
|
| macawber |
if they get rid of that horrible group of people around them-don was,leavell,etc and mick and keith sit down and write some real stones songs instead of something geared to sell records and get on mtv then there's a chance we could see something good.
i kinda get the feeling maybe keith would rather not do it at all than kowtow to the mainstream again.
|
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
Well yeah, Mick did say "We HAVE to do it".
But I compare that to someone that HAS to do something that they really don't want to do. Kind of like when you have to do something at your job, but if you could choose, you really wouldn't do it. And no one is forcing them to do it, so they can choose.
But, referring to Mick's statement, I believe that he stated that it's not a necessity because of the fact that they hate being in the studio. He talks about how these problems arise and he contrasted it to being on the road (saying that they like it [the road] more because it feels "new").
What I think it all boils down to is finances, plain and simple. They could easily pick up stuff in the "can" that they've potentially "saved" and put some make-up on it and put it out. But they probably look at it as a financial mistake. So they go the way that will bring them the big dollars - they go on tour. I guess you can't blame them, though.
I think that when 1989 came around, the demand for tours quickly rose over the declining desire of a new album. In the interviews they kind of cat-walk around these questions and "try to give some hope" - I think that if Mick or Keith just came out and said "What the fuck for?" instead, they'd disappoint a lot of hardcore fans. |
|
|
| macawber |
it sucks though because you know if they really put their minds to it they could make a great record.
when they take the easy way out and go on the road they make more money but the band turns more and more into a nostalgia act.what a waste of talent.
|
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
They still take a few risks (rehearsing loads of songs to get some "new old" songs in; I didn't think the "Theatre-Arena-Stadium" bit was a big deal - they only played theatres in the big cities)but the live album "No Security", in my opinion, probably put a chink in their armor. The sales were abysmal for there standards and we know how it is with the Stones and money. Both have to be high on the meter.
Guys like Dylan, Cash, Westerberg - they could probably give a shit less what critics think about them. Why can't the Stones be like this now? They kind of let that go, didn't they? The "fuck you" attitude...they could easily put out an album of great tunes but I think they are afraid of potential results. |
|
|
| Steel Wheels |
The Uncut issue is recalled so many different ways.
The bottom line regarding new tunes:
Mick seems interested, Keith does not.
It's that sort of shit that makes a double album possible.
In their own sweet way, the Stones will make beautiful, raw, driving, and passionate music. They are the only band that matters these days. Just the Stones. Just the best. The Rolling Stones! |
|
|
| IanBillen |
quote:
monkeyboymark wrote:
No it was in the Uncut birthday issue-page 53 to be exact!!!
Thank you for the confirmation. I had Un-cut in my head but
I wasn't sure so I didn't want to say anything. I knew I read it though.
Ian |
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]
